Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development                                                        www.iiste.orgISSN ...
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development                                                        www.iiste.orgISSN ...
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development                                                          www.iiste.orgISS...
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development                                                         www.iiste.orgISSN...
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development                                                      www.iiste.orgISSN 22...
This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5

An assessment of the constraints of implementing technological innovative entrepreneurial development programmes in nigeria.


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

An assessment of the constraints of implementing technological innovative entrepreneurial development programmes in nigeria.

  1. 1. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.orgISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3, No.13, 2012An Assessment of the Constraints of Implementing TechnologicalInnovative Entrepreneurial Development Programmes in Nigeria. ARIBABA Foluso Olugbenga Obafemi Awolowo University, Centre for Distance Learning, Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria. Email: study identified the constraints of implementing Technological Innovative Entrepreneurial DevelopmentProgrammes in Nigeria. This is with a view to improving on the quality of the entrepreneurial developmentprogrammes and fast tracking the development of small-scale businesses in Nigeria. One hundred and sixtyof 200 small-scale industrialists on the register of the National Association of Small-Scale Industrialist (NASSI)Ondo state chapter were randomly selected for this study. Data were collected from 100 firms through the use ofquestionnaire, interview schedule and personal observation. Descriptive statistics were employed for dataanalysis. The results of the study showed that accessibility to the programmes (28.10%) and finance (24.20%)are the major limiting factors on the implementation of the programmes, and lack of awareness of theprogrammes (3.80%) was the least factor militating against the implementation of the entrepreneurshipdevelopment programmes. The study concluded that in general, accessibility and finance are the major limitingfactors militating against the implementation of Entrepreneurial Development Programmes in Nigeria.Key words: keywords, Turnkey project and Entrepreneur1. IntroductionIn 1946, the Nigeria Local Development Board (NLDB) was formed and later replaced in 1949, by threeregional Development Boards with the basic function of providing funds and advice for entrepreneurs (Ojo,1996). However, after about two and half decades (1960-1986) of adopting industrialization based on large scalebusinesses, mainly of turn key technology; Nigeria as a country has achieved very little in terms ofindustrialization. The large scale industries were capital intensive and most if not all the equipment needed inputting these industries in full operational capability were not readily available in the country hence importationof component parts (Ojo, 1996). Therefore, the tripled objective of setting-up the largest achievement of high level local value added foreignexchange saving and acquisition of transferred technology could not be achieved. For instance, the large scaleindustries (assembly plants, steel rolling mills) have not achieved up to 25% local raw materials sourcing, butthey are more or less systematic foreign exchange guzzlers with neither the wit nor the capacity to transfer anymeaningful technology beyond the primitive type (Sule, 1986). Furthermore, the oil boom of the 1970’s enhanced further establishment of large scale industries in Nigeria.Industries that came into being as a result of the oil boom are steel manufacturing company at Ajaokuta,Petroleum refineries, and vehicle assembly plants among others. As a result of the establishment of these large-scale industries, people started migrating from the rural tourban areas in search of greener pastures in these industries. The mass exodus of people from rural to urbanhalted the development of small-scale business that had started before independence. Job seekers looking forjobs that were not available in the cities further compounded the problem. In response to these weaknesses of the large scale industries enterprises, government at both the federal andstate level developed various strategies to correct the situation by encouraging the establishment of Small andMedium Scale Enterprises (SME) as a strategy for creating employment opportunities, utilization of local rawmaterials and retention of able-bodied men and women in the rural areas. Sequel to these, the government at both the federal and the state levels established some institutions toprovide financial, technological, managerial and technical assistance to small-scale enterprises. These includedthe setting up of 13 Industrial Development Centres (IDCs) in the six geo-political zones of the country toprovide: technical appraisals of application for loan; training for the entrepreneurs carrying out applied researchinto product design for small-scale industries and industrial extension services. Other institutions set up topromote small-scale businesses are: the Nigeria Bank for Commerce and Industry (NBCI), Micro CreditSchemes, Small and Medium Scale Enterprises Development Agency of Nigeria (SMEDAN) and NationalDirectorate of Employment (NDE). Furthermore, The Federal Government in 1989 promulgated the Decree No 2 of S9 to establish NationalEconomic Reconstruction Fund (NERFUND) to attend to the problems faced by the small-scale enterprises in 41
  2. 2. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.orgISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3, No.13, 2012obtaining long-term loan from banks. This body is however saddled with the responsibilities of mobilizingfinancial resources of a long-term nature from government, Central Bank of Nigeria CBN), AfricanDevelopment Bank, Export Credit Agencies etc., for the use and development of indigenous small-scaleenterprises. However, despite the efforts of Government in increasing the participation of the small-scale businessentrepreneurs in the economy, her efforts have not yielded much fruits. Most of the entrepreneurs do not makeuse of the technology or technical assistance provided by government as a result of the cost, lack of knowledge,awareness and the technical composition of their enterprises. Thus, the World Bank became disillusioned withAfrican states, particularly; the public sector as a vehicle for economic development (McCormick, 1999). Thisresulted in emphasizing the role of entrepreneurs in developing business, especially small and medium scaleenterprises which provides employment for more people than any other sector (Streeton, 1987; Afsher, 1992). The late 1980s marked the beginning of dwindling oil revenue, budget indiscipline and no appreciablereturns on investments. Hence, government had to result to borrowing in order to finance its programmes. Fordecades, public enterprises and corporations [such as Nigerian Telecommunication Limited (NITEL), NationalElectric Power Authority (now Power Holding Company of Nigeria), Nigeria Railway Corporation (NRC) etc.]constituted drainpipes of the economy and public treasury. The situation almost made government to becomebankrupt with misery and poverty evident in every home. As a result of these, government introduced someeconomic policies, reforms and measures in correcting the situation. Among these policies and programmes are:austerity measure in 1980; Operation Feed the Nation (OFN) in 1977: Green Revolution in 1980. In the recent past, the government at the Federal, State and Local levels has emphasized the need for theestablishment and development of small-scale enterprises in the nation. This however, became necessary as aresult of the failure of the large-scale industries to achieve the needed economic development and growth andconsequent failure of it to address the unemployment situation in the country. The development of small-scale enterprises started in the 1940’s with the establishment of the ColonyDevelopment Boards (CDB) by the colonial master. The development continued after independence and itfeatured prominently in the first post independent National Development plan of 1962-1968, second NationalDevelopment plan of 1970-1975 and the third National Development Plan of 1975-1980. Thirteen IndustrialDevelopment Centres were established to enhance and encourage the development of small-scale industries.Institutions such as National Directorate of Employment (NDE) and National Economic Reconstruction Fund(NERFUND) were set up for the development of indigenous small-scale enterprises. Also, a number of technological innovative entrepreneurship development programmes which aimed atdeveloping the entrepreneurial imaginations, traits, performance, growth and behaviours of Nigerianindustrialization and new investors/entrepreneur was implemented by government with the technical support ofthe United Nation Development Programme (UNDP) and the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Apart from the above, in Ondo State, the Ministry of Commerce and industry assisted by the NationalDirectorate of Employment (NDE) organised technological innovative entrepreneurial training programmes forsmall-scale businesses between 2004 and 2011 with about 2500 small-scale business entrepreneur participants.However, despite all efforts by government at promoting entrepreneurship either directly or indirectly by foreignagencies and government, there has been no deliberate attempt at evaluating the constraints of implementing theentrepreneurial Development Programmes in Nigeria. Therefore, the study examined the constraints ofimplementing the entrepreneurial Development Programmes in Nigeria.2. Definition of small businessOne of the major difficulties facing researchers in the small-scale sector is the problem of conceptualization.Since a complete spectrum of firm areas exit in any country, any definition creates a rather arbitrary dividing linebetween firms. The measure most commonly used is the number of employees but the dividing line chosenvaries from country to country and extends from 5 to 500. Though, the foregoing could be regarded as basic ingredients for a small-scale enterprise, there are varyinginterpretations, which differ from country to country and from industry to industry. In the United Kingdom, theEconomic Advisory Group classified small business according to industry in terms of net assets and turnoverranging between £ 20,000 to £ 25,000 and £ 50,000 to £ 500,000 in business turnover, (Ojo 1996). These arepresently equivalent to N4.4rn to N5.5m and Nl0m for net asset and turnover respectively. However, thesedefinitions may not be applicable in Nigeria. The United Nations Industrial Development Organization in 1958classified a business as being small only if it has less than 150 employees on its pay roll (Ojo 1996). In Japan,the laws for assisting small-scale industries recognize upper limit of 300 employees and investment of 10 millionyen for manufacturing enterprises (Steinhoff, 1982). In Nigeria, the Centre for Industrial Research Development(CIRD) of the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife in 1996 defines a small-scale business as an enterprise 42
  3. 3. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.orgISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3, No.13, 2012having a capital base (excluding land and building) of between 1 million and N20 million, employing fewer than50 full-time workers (CIRD, 1996). The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) guidelines also defined small-scale business as an establishment whoseturnover does not exceed N500,000. The Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry equates business in thesmall-scale category with those whose capital (i.e. Total cost excluding cost of land) is not over N750, 000(Ekpenyong, 1992). The Nigerian Bank for Commerce and Industry(NBCI) defined small-scale enterprises asfirms with assets, including working capital but excluding land not exceeding N750, 000 (Ekpenyong, 1992).Lastly, the Federal Ministry of industries prior to Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) and Second-tierForeign Exchange Market (SFEM) also defined small-scale enterprises as any manufacturing process or serviceindustry with a capital investment not more than N150,000 in plant and machinery. There is no lower limit forthe capital investment and this made the definition to embrace conventional distributive and small-scaleindustries including the enterprises of self-employed artisans. During SAP era, the maximum capital investmentlevel of N150,000 was adjusted toN500,000 and this definition has been guiding lenders in their classification ofbusiness. The Nigerian Bank for Commerce and Industries (NBCI) in 1981/82 for purpose of the revolving loanscheme for small scale industries, small scale enterprises were regarded as those investing not more than N500,000 (excluding the cost of land but including working capital). For the period of 1985-1990, the bank officialdefinition covered firms whose capital cost does not exceed N750, 000 (including working capital but excludingland) (NBCI, 1985).Bolton (1978) saw the small firm as a socio-economic unit with the following characteristics:(a) economically, a firm that has a relatively small share of its market;(b) managerially, a firm that is administered by its owners or part owners in a personalized way, rather thanthrough the medium of a formalized management structure; and(c) a firm that is independent in the sense that, it does not form part of larger enterprises and owner-managers arefree from outside control in taking their principal decision. However, lack of available data on ownership, management structure and market shares of firms, make theapplication of this definition difficult. For the manufacturing industry, the committee adopted a less satisfactorystatistical definition of 200 employees or less. No one single definition of size fits all instances. Even a definitionof sizes, in terms of numbers employed, leaves us with many problems. For instance, a car firm employing athousand personnel would be considered “small” in the context of its industry. On the other hand, in the printingindustry, a firm employing 200 personnel could be considered to be medium-sized or even large. However, inany examination of social characteristics and social dynamics of the small firm, a definition of size in terms ofnumbers employed is, overall, usually the most appropriate. Outside manufacturing industry, Bolton (1978) used alternative definitions of a small firm. For instance, inthe construction industry firms employing 25 or less employees for its operation will be small-scale business. Inwholesale trades, road transport industry, turnover and number of vehicles may be used as bases for industryclassification respectively. Whatever definition one selects, the fact remains that low levels of investments andturnover usually characterize small-scale businesses with few employees and managers. Accordingly, most of the definitions appear to be governed by the interests of the perceiver, the purpose ofthe definition and the stage of development of the particular environment in which the definition is beingemployed. However, the C1RDs working definition of small- scale businesses (i.e. enterprises) is adopted for thepurpose of this study.3. Research Methodology The study population for this study was entrepreneurs of small-scale business in Ondo State. Data werecollected from both primary and secondary sources. The primary data was collected using questionnaire. Thestudy used both descriptive and inferential statistics.4. Discussion of Results4.1 Sample sizeThe survey covered one hundred and sixty small entrepreneurs from three major towns (Akure, Owo and Ondo)in Ondo State. Of the total 160 respondents 71(44.4%) are from Akure while 48(30%) comes from Ondo and41(25.6%) participants from Owo town (see Table 1). 43
  4. 4. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.orgISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3, No.13, 2012Table 1: Sample size Towns Fequency Percentage(%) Akure 71 44.4 Ondo 48 30.0 Owo 41 25.6 Total 160 100.0Source: Field survey, 20124.2 Constraints of Implementing Entrepreneurship Development ProgrammesIn terms of occurrence and proportion, the following factors have been identified as constraints limiting theimplementation of the technological EDP by the entrepreneurs: Accessibility, Finance, Timing, Duration,Knowledge and lack of awareness. Accessibility and Finance with responses of 28.1% and 24.2% respectivelyare the major constraints of implementing the entrepreneurial development programmes by the small-scalebusiness entrepreneurs in Nigeria. Thirty five (22.4%) of the respondents said it was the timing of thedevelopment programmes that is that limiting factor to their participation in the training programmes. Thirtythree (20.6%) of the respondents said the problem is knowledge of the programmes. However, six(3.8%) of therespondents said they were unaware of the programmes existence at all, while, duration which accounted for 1.9%of the respondents was the least of the constraining factors militating against the implementation of thetechnological entrepreneurial development programmes (see Table 2). The implication is that since accessibility and finance was the major constraints, the benefit of theprogrammes to small-scale business development and growth will continue to elude the country if urgent stepsare not taken.Table 2: Factors Limiting Implementation of the Technological EDP Factors Frequency Percentage(%) Accessibility 45 28.1 Finance 38 24.2 Timing 35 22.4 Duration 2 1.9 Knowledge 33 20.6 Lack of Awareness 6 3.8 Total 160 100.0Source: Field survey, 20125. ConclusionThe study had shown that participation in technological innovative entrepreneurial development programmes haspositive impact on the performance of small-scale businesses. Also, that as good as the programmes arebeneficial to the development of small-scale business; the awareness of its benefit is limited. It also showed thatthe constraints of implementing the technological entrepreneurship development programmes are primarily dueto lack of accessibility on the part of the entrepreneurs to identify the technology relevant to their business. Thisis followed by lack of finance to implement the programme even when the entrepreneurs have the knowledge.This could be addressed by the collaborative efforts of the government and multilateral institutions such thatcertain amount of money is set aside towards these programmes. Also, other constraining factors for the implementation of the programmes are: Timing, knowledge, lack ofawareness and duration of programme. 44
  5. 5. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development www.iiste.orgISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online)Vol.3, No.13, 2012Therefore, there should be drastically steps taken to alleviate the financial burden of the programmes on thesmall-scale business entrepreneurs. Also, the training programmes should be made accessible to theentrepreneurs since most of them may not have the resources to attend training programmes well-outside theirdomains. The timing and duration of the training must be so structured so as to make it friendly to theentrepreneurs to attend and not cause disruptions to their businesses.ReferencesAfsher, H. (1992), Women and Adjustment Policies in the Third World. New York: St. Martin’s press.Aribaba, F.O. (2008), The impact of Technological Innovative Entrepreneurial Development Programmes on theperformance of small-scale businesses in Ondo state, Nigeria, An MSc Thesis, OAU, Ile Ife, NigeriaBolton. J.E. (1978), “The financial Needs of the small firm”. The Banks and Small Businesses. The Institute ofBankers (Cambridge Seminar) London.Callaghy, T.M. (1988, The State and Development of Capitalisation in Africa: Theoretical Historical andComparative Reflections in D. Rothchild.Cantillon. R. (1931,”Essai surla nature do commerce en general” in Higas. eds. . “Essai sur Ia nature ducommerce en general”, Macmillian, London.Casson, M. (1982), The Entrepreneur: An Economic Theory. MartinRobertson Oxford, 23.C1RD, (1996), Definitions and Problems of Small scale and medium scale Enterprises in Nigeria, Industrial Unit,O.A.U., Ile-Ife.Cole, A. H. (1965), Business Enterprise in its Social Setting, Harvard University Press, Boston.Drucker, P.F. (1954), The practice of management, Harper and Roco, Nev’ York.Drucker, P. (1970), “Entrepreneurship in Business Enterprise”. Journal of Business Policy, 1, 50-52.Drucker, P.F. (1986, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Pan Books, London.Ekpeyong, N. (1992), “Entrepreneurship Development Programme which way for Nigeria” NigerianManagement Review, 3, (2) 115-129.Federal Ministry of Economic Development, (1975), “Third National Development plan 1975-1980”. 2, Lagos.Ojo, A (1996), Management of Small and Medium Enterprises in Nigeria, Nigeria: Pumak, Nigeria Ltd.Say, J.B., quoted in Cole, A.H. (1965), The Entrepreneur: Introductory remarks: in H.J.G., Altkeu, (eds.),Explorations in enterprise: an approach to the study of entrepreneurship, Harvard University press, CambridgeMass., 32-33.Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development”, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 64.Schumpeter, J.A. (1939), Business Cycles: A Theoretical Historical and Statistical Analysis of capitalist process,1 edition, 2nd impression, Mcgraw-Hill. Maridenhead, 64.Schumpeter, J.A. (1950): Capitalism. Socialism, and Dernocrac), 3rd edition, Harper and Row, New York.Steinhoff. D. (1982), Small Business Management Fundamentals, Ne York: Mac Grax Hill inc.Streeton, p. (1987), “Structural Adjustment: A survey of issues and options World Development Report” 15/12,1469-1682.Sule, E.I.K. (1986), “Small-Scale Industries in Nigeria: Concepts, Appraisals of some Government Policies andsuggested solutions to identified problems”. Economic and financial Review of CBN, 24/4. 24. 45
  6. 6. This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open AccessPublishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute isAccelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage: CALL FOR PAPERSThe IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals andcollaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline forsubmission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submissioninstruction on the following page: IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualifiedsubmissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to thereaders all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other thanthose inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of thejournals is also available upon request of readers and authors.IISTE Knowledge Sharing PartnersEBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrichs Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP OpenArchives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, ElektronischeZeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe DigtialLibrary , NewJour, Google Scholar